If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

Why do they stick on feature-driven releases. Xorg is in the open source world one of the biggest mess.

The last Ubuntu-version showed it again, the intel-driver is not stable and have some regressions, that stinks.
With git its no big deal to manage a seperate branch for new stuff and manage the old codebase as long as the new stuff dont work without regressions.

So whats the problem with a release without new major featurer, updated drivers and some fixes are enough.

But release-cycles like xorg 7.4 stinks.

And by the way all this fuckin firms who earn much money with linux could pay some developer for this project. its the bottleneck of the open source world.

Comment

I'd have to say that ever since the modularization, there's absolutely no need to put out a release just to have updated drivers and fixes.

Want 7.4 with an updated driver X? Just get 7.4, and then the source for driver X, and soon you have a Xorg release from after 7.4, with fixes and a newer driver.

On Ubuntu's latest Intel mess, isn't that the fault of time-based releasing? If they could've waited for a better Intel driver, things would have been smoother. Or picked an older version if they just had to release at date Y.

Comment

Why? Because they have a feature plan for the release. I personally prefer the version X contains Y features over the version X is released on y.mm Ultimately the reason is that projects like Ubuntu and Wine don't use the feature release cycle is because the model doesn't fit.

Comment

I'd have to say that ever since the modularization, there's absolutely no need to put out a release just to have updated drivers and fixes.

Want 7.4 with an updated driver X? Just get 7.4, and then the source for driver X, and soon you have a Xorg release from after 7.4, with fixes and a newer driver.

On Ubuntu's latest Intel mess, isn't that the fault of time-based releasing? If they could've waited for a better Intel driver, things would have been smoother. Or picked an older version if they just had to release at date Y.

I've been becoming more and more convinced of the following every day. The latest Ubuntu Intel Mess (TM) is a very clever way to do releases. Releasing broken Intel drivers is without a doubt, the best and most sure-fire way to get them fixed as quickly as possible. Especially with a huge userbase the size of Ubuntu's.

Say, for the sake of example, 1/3 of Ubuntu's users were affected because they were using Intel drivers, that's going to annoy a lot of people. Both the kernel, and the driver devs will be hounded into fixing them asap.

And the real cost? Ubuntu breaks on 1/3 of existing machines, for a single 6-month release which is already established as a bleeding-edge release. Compare that to Microsoft who break 3/3 people's computers every 7 years when they release things like Vista.

Everyone knew the Intel drivers were broken before the release, I did at least. The solution was not to upgrade, LTS is LTS for a reason. 6 months is a very short amount of time, average users don't upgrade every 6 months, not in my experience anyway.

The cost of breaking everything for 6 months compared to how quickly it will prompt things to be fixed is without a doubt an incredibly efficient way to drive development. Much more efficient than the proprietary model in my opinion.

Comment

Wine don't use the feature release cycle is because the model doesn't fit.

Wine uses a feature-based release cycle. There was a clear set of goals for 1.0, and it wasn't released until they were met. The're a list of features for the next wine release (1.2), but no time yet. See http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleasePlan

the bi-weekly stuff you see are development snapshots, not releases.

Comment

Wine uses a feature-based release cycle. There was a clear set of goals for 1.0, and it wasn't released until they were met. The're a list of features for the next wine release (1.2), but no time yet. See http://wiki.winehq.org/WineReleasePlan

the bi-weekly stuff you see are development snapshots, not releases.

Not exactly. Snap shots don't have version numbers, and their 1.0 release did not meet the blocking bug requirements but did the date scheduled.